The Delhi High Court on Wednesday dismissed a public interest litigation (PIL) petition challenging the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) provisions criminalising the offence of waging war against the Government of India [Upendra Nath Dalai v Union of India Ministry of Home Affairs].
A Division Bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela said that it will also consider imposing costs on the petitioner Upendra Nath Dalai.
The Bench cautioned the petitioner for filing the same petition repeatedly, even though his earlier petitions had been rejected by the High Court.
The Bench noted that in certain cases, the petitioner was provided with counsel speaking the petitioner's native language, and in another case, a senior counsel was asked to help him.
The Court also pulled up the petitioner for making references to the Pulwama terror attack in his case.
“We are cautioning you! The kind of petition you have filed. First, you file a writ petition, then you seek a review and then another… Merely changing the words of a prayer in a petition will not allow you to file a writ petition,” the Court said.
The Court added that the Court is not the appropriate forum for making arguments made in the petition.
“This is not the platform to indulge in public discourse on a subject or topic. You are in a court of law, and you must understand that. You are arguing a legal issue. Your venue is somewhere else. We are requesting you. We have even provided you help of an advocate and a Senior Advocate - someone with the capability to speak to you in Odia,” the Court added.
Dalai moved the High Court challenging Section 147 to 158 of the BNS, which deal with the offences and punishments for waging war against India and penalise "aiding, rescuing, or harbouring a State prisoner or prisoner of war who is escaping lawful custody".
He told the Court that the High Court has the power to deal with the matter and the provisions violate fundamental rights of the citizens.
However, the Court cautioned the petitioner again that there are different grounds to challenge the violation of fundamental rights.
"Ye grounds nahi hote jo aapne diye hain. Hum aapko kayi baar sachet kar chuke hain. Aapke lekh likhne ke liye ye sab theek hai par petition me ye sab nahi hota (These are not the grounds to challenge. We have cautioned you many times. All these grounds are alright if you want to write an opinion piece, but not in a petition)," the Court remarked.
Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Chetan Sharma appeared for the Central government and told the Court that the petitioner was a repeat offender and that heavy costs should be imposed on him.
Chief Justice Upadhyaya asked ASG Sharma how such instances can be prevented.
Sharma reiterated that costs must be imposed in such cases.
"It [the Court] should not be an open gate for everyone to say anything they want. It is very serious. Your lordships will have to come down hard on this man. Appearances are deceptive, and this man is deceptive," Sharma added.
The Court then said that it will consider imposing costs on the petitioner.
It then dismissed the plea.